From lojban+bncCICntNPQBRC_t8LfBBoEp5Q2hg@googlegroups.com Sun May 16 18:28:50 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ODp8P-000827-DC; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:50 -0700 Received: by pwi7 with SMTP id 7sf635481pwi.16 for ; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received:date :in-reply-to:x-ip:references:user-agent:x-http-useragent:message-id :subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=/1flUICRMhQ3uxIhf7zNksHWHT/wLO6aDPu4TCImTfY=; b=Tmmy6XqoqkS28zfnNPAC0hdeovamdChNJMJFskPKZeCE6tuOsNH3FNRtzb1dT1ZFqC uhuOymmuczN/MRj3cXGxo7TuKwIPJ/+hYGVPrAY3ZBY53z4bzDNvMb5bX9InxQ2vSsNG M8cL7x4dI7GoXCx+pmai5YBCq8vNAs9fNadY8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:date:in-reply-to:x-ip :references:user-agent:x-http-useragent:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=eh20IQJWidUGsk490p9ynKVw/FSzYqEcdhw8a8P33L+w003eb0/xT+2wiJ7pFsCpdg zuc39o2cX+O4lGCXZy8xiZoln796nB4ZBtahpnQAzF/QuWyCdzOBLUZtdsoy12Fsv0au MWKPEzWtRzG9A0OuKwq4HGl57Oq2N8e9eTmv8= Received: by 10.115.81.10 with SMTP id i10mr664967wal.13.1274059711037; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:31 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.115.133.33 with SMTP id k33ls5884314wan.2.p; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.189.1 with SMTP id m1mr1895516waf.24.1274059709749; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.189.1 with SMTP id m1mr1895515waf.24.1274059709688; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw0-f56.google.com (mail-gw0-f56.google.com [74.125.83.56]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id u10si7567186wak.6.2010.05.16.18.28.29; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 74.125.83.56 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lindarthebard@yahoo.com) client-ip=74.125.83.56; Received: by mail-gw0-f56.google.com with SMTP id 20so882136gwj.11 for ; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.101.152.1 with SMTP id e1mr160809ano.77.1274059709345; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by m31g2000pre.googlegroups.com with HTTP; Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-IP: 173.196.20.139 References: User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.3) Gecko/20100401 Firefox/3.6.3 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe) Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Re: Named multiples From: Lindar To: lojban X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 74.125.83.56 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lindarthebard@yahoo.com) smtp.mail=lindarthebard@yahoo.com X-Original-Sender: lindarthebard@yahoo.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I do not like this idea at all. Leave names be names. What's wrong with {.i mi klama fu le mi karce no'u la .opel.} if you have to be explicit about the brand name? I've never had a problem with {.i citka la .spagetis.} at any point. You're eating something named spaghetti. It's the name of the dish. You're driving something named Opel, it's the brand of the car. Stop trying to conform Lojban to your native language. If we make cmevla usable as selbri, then there's little to no point or motive to create or use fu'ivla, and then we might as well just say "fuck it" and use all English words written in Lojban phonology. This is a horrible idea. By your logic we may as well say {.i mi .going. .stor. .xaus.}, and then why bother? Just speak English. >_> To me you're now breaking the uniqueness of Lojban by essentially making a really stupid shortcut so nobody has to use fu'ivla or lujvo ever again. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.